Gould praises Brexit vote

It is amazing and wonderful that ordinary British people have at this late stage – after 43 years of membership – refused to be bullied and patronised by their supposed betters, by so-called experts and powerful financial interests, into betraying their own experience and judgment. The result is a new start for both Britain and Europe and a new and better prospect for both.

Gould also looks at Corbyn’s arguments for staying:

Jeremy Corbyn has – through timidity rather than conviction – put himself on the losing side and missed the chance to exploit for Labour the unavoidable blow to the authority of the Tory Government that the Brexit decision represents.

He took refuge in an argument for remaining that should surely have no place in the vocabulary of a Labour leader. He urged Labour supporters to vote remain on the surprising ground that there were provisions, particularly concerning workers’ rights, that were beyond the reach of democratic change by an elected British Government.

How odd that Labour should endorse the concept of government by an unelected European bureaucracy.

Corbyn’s argument was that an unelected EU could protect workers from democracy in the UK!

How much more constructive and politically astute if he had faithfully represented the views of Labour voters (and almost certainly his own personal preference) as a step towards a democratically elected Labour Government that would have been the best protector of workers’ rights.

Related Stories

Comments (53)

Jeremy Corbyn has – through timidity rather than conviction – put himself on the losing side

This is the thing which dooms his position. He was elected by membership over the wishes of the established Labour organisation but never represented that membership (unless those who supported were, as some suggest, only Labour-lite members from London).

Corbyn seems like a rebel who can’t make up his mind what he wishes to rebel against first, getting caught with feet on separate boats. He could have wielded his grass root support but, just like everyone else they gave the finger to, he stood against their wishes.

So quite apart from whatever other failings he has (and I don’t think they’re as bad as his opponents like to paint him with) he doesn’t seem clued up enough to play politics for realz.

Manolo

David Garrett

And the opinion of a never-was (as opposed to a has been) relic from the Militant Tendency faction of British Labour is worth reading…why exactly? What did this guy ever achieve in a lengthy political career?

Old.Mickey.Blue.Eyes

Sarkozygroupie

What is the history of the relationship between Gould and Corbyn? Were they in different factions of the Labour Party early on and who shafted who first? Other than that I have no time for this anti-Semite.

How much more constructive and politically astute if he had faithfully represented the views of Labour voters (and almost certainly his own personal preference) as a step towards a democratically elected Labour Government that would have been the best protector of workers’ rights.

It may have escaped Gould’s attention that Britain actually has a Tory government, not a Labour one, and that this Tory government can rule until at least 2020, and that one of the reasons the right wing of that government wanted out of the EU is it will end the EU’s protection of workers’ rights. He’s correct that a Labour government can protect British workers’ rights better than the EU can, but when Labour isn’t the government it can’t protect British workers’ rights at all. Maybe he’s thinking Corbyn’s a failure if there isn’t a Labour government in perpetuity? It wouldn’t surprise me, the response to Corbyn by Labour’s right is anything but rational.

eszett

It is amazing and wonderful that ordinary British people have at this late stage – after 43 years of membership – refused to be bullied and patronised by their supposed betters, by so-called experts and powerful financial interests, into betraying their own experience and judgment.

LOL. I have to laugh at the “so-called experts”. After all, it seems they were right, weren’t they? Pound and FTSE 250 in free-fall and all the pro-Brexit “experts” retreating on all their major promises a mere 24 hours after the vote. All that rhetoric and now they are stepping on all the brakes that they have realising the consequences of their actions.

The ordinary British people have been indeed been patronised and bullied by the lies and misinformation of Johnson and Farage and co. into betraying their own interest and judgment.

Good luck to Johnson, I do hope he becomes PM and takes responsibility for this mess.

tom hunter

…particularly concerning workers’ rights, that were beyond the reach of democratic change by an elected British Government.

To what end? Such “protection” has protected the rights of European workers into the ground. Sure, there are other factors but in most of the EU the unemployment stats are bad, like in the range of 10% bad, and have been that way for years, which makes it even worse. Then there’s the youth unemployment figures which are even worse again and have been for as long.

That’s protection? FFS.

But that really goes to the heart of Corbyn’s problems, and the Left’s in Britain. They think the only way there can be protection is to have a giant, central administrative government bureaucracy and Brussels was it. Even when the control proved to be senseless and useless they’re still pursue because it’s the essence of what they are nowadays. Control for the sake of control. More centralisation because what exists at the moment is not enough. They’ve lost sight of what the hell it’s actually supposed to do in the real world, which is real good.

But the working class spread across the parties had not lost sight of that fact of life. When they looked for “protection” they did not see Brussels as providing it, and if Corbyn and the rest of the power-and-state-worshipping Left leadership in Labour could not, well – out they go too.

davidp

I’m having trouble keeping up with the inconsistent hysteria on social media. I have a friend who is Scottish but lives in Canada. He’s been posting several hysterical updates a day. As far as I can tell, he was pro-Scottish independence at their last referendum. But he is shocked at UK independence. But when I suggest that only racist simple-minded Canadians oppose joining the US and being ruled from Washington, then it seems he is pro-Canadian independence.

I have an American friend who is disappointed by Brexit. But doesn’t like the idea that the US Declaration of Independence was a big mistake, and that the US lost of benefits of being ruled from London by the super-bureaucrats of the 1776 British Empire. George Washington and the American people were clearly racist. And idiots. And they must have regretted the Declaration the day after it was delivered.

Evadne

Eszett: the FTSE is not in free fall – there was a sudden market adjustment but it’s now climbing back up, and is actually higher now than it was in February this year(and not far off where it was 2 weeks ago).

As far as the UK economy is concerned, a low pound is more beneficial than a high one: it helps their exports and job growth. Most OECD countries would love a 10% drop in their currency.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Tuesday after EU leaders met with British Prime Minister David Cameron for the first time since his country voted for Brexit that she believed there was no going back on the U.K.’s decision to leave the bloc.

“I see no possibility to reverse this. We would do well to accept this reality,” Merkel told reporters at the summit in Brussels. “This not a time for wishful thinking, but to see things as they are.”

“the FTSE is not in free fall – there was a sudden market adjustment but it’s now climbing back up, and is actually higher now than it was in February this year”

Not true Evadne. Britian’s economy has actually totally collapsed, thousands of Brits have spontaneously combusted, children are right now throwing themselves off the cliffs of Dover, Britian itself is literally sinking into the sea as we speak, and hordes of aliens from another galaxy are heading to earth right now to invade us, all because of Brexit!!! Aaaarrrggghhh!!! 🙂

Ross12

I think Corbyn might have been “closet” Leave believer but his position put him between a rock and hard place.

Fletch –maybe Merkel is pleased that Brexit occurred because now the “super state” idea could have better chance of success. With the UK in the EU with it’s special provisions , it could have hindered progress.

B.L.Zeebub

The simpleton ‘remainers’ , still whining and bleating about a democratic vote,having had their entire comfortable lives handed to them on a plate don`t understand the concept of ‘no pain no gain’.
Soon the Pound will be back to its normal place in the currency market and the FTSE will rebound ,such is the cycle of these manufactured crises.
Soon ,other countries that value their independence will begin to leave in droves,driven away by the witless bureaucracy of the EU politburo.

Albert_Ross

Watching the Left, pampered rich liberals, and other supporters of the fourth Reich tear their hair out over Brexit has been an absolute joy.

It has indeed, and I’ve lost a few Facebook friends for saying so.

But I notice you haven’t been as assiduous in collecting and reporting examples of really nasty, bigoted behaviour by a very small minority of Brexit supporters and claiming that this shows Brexit to be based on bigoted nastiness, as you are to collect and report examples of terrorist atrocities by a very small minority of Muslims and claim that this shows Islam to be a religion of atrocious terrorism.

In fact, stories relating to the former have been totally unremarked by Kiwiblog.

eszett

Evadne (146 comments) says:
June 29th, 2016 at 5:04 pm
Eszett: the FTSE is not in free fall – there was a sudden market adjustment but it’s now climbing back up, and is actually higher now than it was in February this year(and not far off where it was 2 weeks ago).

As far as the UK economy is concerned, a low pound is more beneficial than a high one: it helps their exports and job growth. Most OECD countries would love a 10% drop in their currency.

Yeah, right.
If the Brexit is so wonderfully beneficial to the UK, why is it the Brexiters are dragging their feet to start the process? Why is now suddenly Boris Johnson saying there is no rush to trigger Article 50, yadda yadda yadda.

After all that blustering, those Brexiters are very subdued. Mostly because they realise the enormity of what lies ahead of them.
Boris Johnson only ever wanted to be PM, he never really wanted a Brexit. All he wanted was a close call, enough to weaken Cameron and then take over.

Ross12

eszett

Shawn Herles (13,429 comments) says:
June 29th, 2016 at 5:02 pm
Watching the Left, pampered rich liberals, and other supporters of the fourth Reich tear their hair out over Brexit has been an absolute joy.

Brexit is not a left-right issue, even though you would love it to be. There are Brexiters on the left as well as Remainers on the right.

Trying to frame it into a left-right issue just shows that your advocacy for the Brexit is more based on some irrational desire to “stick it to them” rather than some rational argumentation.

Invoking nazi terminology is further testament to that. Especially ironic, given that a proportion of the pro-Brexit crowd was driven by xenophobia, especially the UKIP crowd.

eszett

Ross12 (2,406 comments) says:
June 29th, 2016 at 7:45 pm
eszett

At present it is Cameron’s responsibility to trigger Acticle 50 –he needs to get his A into G and do it.

Yes, it is, but Cameron is certainly not in favour of the Brexit, never was. Why should he do Boris’ dirty work?
And the point is that none of the Brexiters, certainly not Boris, is demanding that he does just that. Now and as soon as possible.

Instead they are dragging their feet, playing for time.

Here is a good take on it, a bit melodramatic, but the essence of it sums it up well.

Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.

And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legislation to be torn up and rewritten … the list grew and grew.

The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.

The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?

Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?

Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-manoeuvred and check-mated.

If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over – Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession … broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.

The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.

When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was “never”. When Michael Gove went on and on about “informal negotiations” … why? why not the formal ones straight away? … he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.

As the GBP plummets & none of the leading Brexit campaigners have planned even first thing to do after the vote to leave. Johnson & Gove have pretty much gone to ground. Farage is grandstanding at Brussels, but is equally clueless as to where next.

The Brexiteers had a duty to the UK to explain what would happen after a vote in their favour, but instead they just pandered to bigotry and “won” on that basis.

Anyway, I think there is a good chance the good people of Scotland will defeat the Little Englanders.

Although Eszett [8.01] has been down ticked, he alerts to a very real possibility.
The Remain camp seem to be gathering and more than willing to over throw the democratic vote by any means possible.
They are intransigently pro the parasitic unelected Empire, and they have God awful power.
Why indeed does Boris not thrust forward for the exit.
Why has the new leader of the Conservative party not emerged immediately
It does not make sense. To shuffle his feet like Cameron is doing would surely result in his public hanging.
There are mighty forces at work. The Empire may be striking back.
The Guardian is already frothing again insanely. Gerrit [10.27] however alerts to the fact that the monster knows no limits to its authority.

eszett

Seriously, the socialists are losing the plot! It’s so incredibly funny.

Vodafone, Goldman Sachs, Siemens, Lloyds, Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan, Visa, Ford all are already considering to move their european HQ to an EU country or stopping their expansion/investments in the UK. Even Virgin and Easyjet are considering a move. Ryanair has announced that it will stop it’s expansion in the UK market and concentrate more on Europe. And there are many more.

Nearly all major businesses have warned about the implications of a Brexit. The Economist was firmly in the Remain camp and with good arguments.

eszett

paul scott (44 comments) says:
June 30th, 2016 at 4:29 am
Although Eszett [8.01] has been down ticked, he alerts to a very real possibility.
The Remain camp seem to be gathering and more than willing to over throw the democratic vote by any means possible.
They are intransigently pro the parasitic unelected Empire, and they have God awful power.

What rubbish.
If they really had so much “God awful power”, why would they have let the referendum turn out as it had?

It’s nothing to do with power, but with the Leave campaign having no idea what to do next. While there was a Leave campaign, there was never a clear common strategy or plan, what does that exactly entail, where do they want to take the UK.

They are literally like the dog that kept chasing and barking after the car and has now suddenly and unexpectedly caught the rear fender and has no clue what to do with it.

stephieboy

Sir Don McKinnon and Paul Henry this morning reflecting on the implications of Brexit.

In no particular order ,’

Our Trade with Britain amounts to 3%

The huge cost of leaving is beginning to dawn and the old commonwealth won’t provide a fix it .

The cost of living will balloon ( including travel in the EC )

Boris Johnson is not PM material . The Torys will go for a more centrist candidate .

Sir Don understands the frustration of Brexit voters over one size fits all free movement of Labour. It simply meant stronger economies in the EC soaking up the labour problems of weaker members .The dream of a United states of Europe was pushed far too quickly . Unworkable at this point in time

Putin may offer the old eastern bloc members a trade deal to entice them away from the EC . Or …. ?

Evadne

Eszett: you are quite right to claim that the disentangling of the UK from the EU will be a long and costly process. That’s doesn’t, ipso facto, mean that it is a wrong decision. Many leave voters may well have been naive enough to think it could happen overnight, and may grow frustrated, which will add to the turmoil. However, I would say a good proportion of Leavers thought it through rationally, acknowledged the task was hard – but still decided it would be worth it in the long run. The truth of that won’t be known until the long run – 10 years or more, probably. Trying to cast predictions or verdicts based on the market kerfuffles of one week is foolish.

The delay in invoking Article 50 has little to do with cold feet or indecision and everything to do with diplomacy and bargaining – at the moment the ball is in the UK’s hands, and they are in a strong negotiating position. Once invoked, the clock starts ticking and the race is on to get the negotiations done – weakening Britain’s hand (hence Brussels being keen for them to push the button now). Britain want to do as much pre-negotiation as possible – both with EU countries and other world players.

eszett

tom hunter (7,406 comments) says:
June 30th, 2016 at 8:39 am
I don’t think I’ve ever seen so many Leftists so supportive of large corporations, so worried about the direction of the financial markets and so dismissive of the discontent of the working classes.

..and so many rightist so dismissive of them and so worried about the working class.

tom hunter

Oh – but we’re supposed to be less caring than the likes of you eszett. Enthralled to the hard world of dollars and the ruthless exploitation because of our lack of empathy and compassion, yada, yada, yada. In fact that deeply instilled belief is implicit in your sarcasm.

But if it turns out that that image weaved over decades by the Left was just that – a false image designed to do nothing more than help you grub for votes – that helps the Right-Wing. A shattered image that aids the Right.

By contrast, if it turns out that Leftists like you were more about worshipping the central power state (or super-state) and that you never actually never gave a shit about the poor and the working class… Well that’s a piece of image shattering I don’t think your lot can survive.

eszett

The delay in invoking Article 50 has little to do with cold feet or indecision and everything to do with diplomacy and bargaining – at the moment the ball is in the UK’s hands, and they are in a strong negotiating position.

Diplomacy, yeah right.

The UK had a strong position while they remained in the EU. Not anymore, Not that she’s voted to leave, all strength is with the EU.
The UK wants access to the markets and has not much to offer.

That’s why the EU wants to proceed as quickly as possible and the Brexiters are dragging their feet.

eszett

By contrast, if it turns out that Leftists like you were more about worshipping the central power state (or super-state) and that you never actually never gave a shit about the poor and the working class… Well that’s a piece of image shattering I don’t think your lot can survive.

LOL, tom, worshipping the central power state? I have to laugh how quickly you buy into the left-right demagogue rhetoric, despite your veneer of intellectualism.

At the end of the day, you are merely a tribalist, an articulate one, but unable to think outside your comfy little box. You would sacrifice your very own ideals as long as it brings you a point for your tribe in a blink of an eye.

Brexit is not a left right issue, but you wish to make it so, because it suits you.

Evadne

Eszett, looks like we’ll have to agree to differ, since we observe the world & the events of the past week entirely differently.

I believe that the EU has more to lose over Brexit that the UK, and is heading into even greater uncertainty. You can even see this reflected in the market response you are so keen to discuss. The FTSE has recovered to pre-Brexit levels; the various EU indices are well down (6% in Germany, 14% in Greece, for example). The EU faces losing its 2nd biggest economy, Germany its greatest ally.

You claim the UK has little offer the EU. It goes the other way – for example, the UK is a hugely important market for French wine & food, and German cars & products (amongst others). Germany can’t afford to lose that market; the UK can look to USA and further to replace it.

That’s not to say it will all be rosy & easy. There will inevitably be winners & losers. But if the UK goes under because of this, the EU will fall further and quicker. And in a recession or uncertainty, an independent Britain can manage its own economic policy to weather the storm; the unwieldy EU will be hide-bound (as seen during the GFC fallout). Couple that with political turmoil in many EU countries, and the result would not be pretty.

Evadne

tom hunter

… this has got very little to do with traditional left/right politics.

I agree. But it does have everything to do with left/right ideology, the centrepiece of which is the Left’s endless desire for greater and more centralised power in the state. There is cross-over with elements of the Right on this issue, and there always has been.

Similarly there has been cross-over between Left and Right on the opposite push, to have the state less involved with controlling the individual. The trouble is that the Left don’t agree with that when it comes to the economics and trade of individuals (vast nation-state systems such as the TPP feed back into the central state power factor), and the Right don’t agree when it comes to personal choices on things like sexuality and drugs.

But the Right has been losing the latter for some time now. I don’t think anybody would deny the Right has lost the so-called “culture wars”, even in the US. Meantime the Left, having been set back within nation states like the Anglosphere by the likes of Reagan, Thatcher and Douglas, have tried regaining the same degree of control via international agreements of all types, which are then used as a hammer against local decisions.

Brexit, as well as the rise of Trump and Sanders, show that this may about to be reversed, which is why we’re getting the same squealing that we heard in the reaction against the great deregulations of the 1980’s and ’90’s. Once again there is a threat to centralised power and all the rules, regulations and controls it produces. That some on the “Right” are also frightened of this says more about what they always were than about their ideology. That Sanders and Trump supporters don’t see their guy as representing exactly what they’re unhappy about – more state power – says more about their anger than their rationality.

The 21st century fights will not be about Left vs Right but about the individual vs the collective.

eszett

Evadne

I’m not sure it’s just about the individual vs. collective, Tom. It’s also about the people (as individuals, not a mass) vs the “elite” or “establishment” (the individuals who want to rule the mass). Self-determination vs. totalitarianism.

I was disgusted (but not, sadly enough, shocked) by the sentiments expressed by many, including Smalley and the WaPo, that the referendum showed that some matters are “too important” to be decided by the people, and should be left to their betters.

Much hyperbole was spoken by people on all sides in the aftermath of the vote, but while lacking perhaps some accuracy, one British commentator captured the spirit of it all when he said that this is the greatest uprising of the common people of Britain since the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381. The British don’t do revolutions. That’s why this result is so extraordinary – not a slim majority in a political vote, but a real uprising of sentiment and decision.

There were many different things inspiring the Leavers, but they had a commonality superbly captured by the very wise CS Lewis:

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be “cured” against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”

There reaches the point where enough is enough; even the British will revolt.

… mosey over to the promised land and have a chat with anyone who still votes Meretz, though you may have to hurry as there are fewer and fewer of them with each electoral cycle. Catch one on a good day, though, and you will probably hear the following account of all that plagues the state of the Jews: Israelis, goes the leftist ur-narrative, used to be reasonable and genial people. They used to believe in peace, which is why they signed the Oslo accords and welcomed back Yasser Arafat and strove toward a permanent two-state solution of peace and reconciliation.

Then, like a devil out of Bulgakov, Netanyahu, a Middle East Mephistopheles, appeared on the scene, and, with his dark tricks, poisoned hearts and minds, turning Israelis from a gaggle of glowing Labor-voters to a rabble of benighted boobs, always reaching for their pitchforks and always thirsty for blood. If only reason would prevail, cries the Israeli left, peace will soon return. And if it does not, disaster is almost certain.

Sounds famiiar, as the article goes on to point out.

Translate these attitudes into the Queen’s English, and you’ll hear an all-too-familiar story. Labour, for long the occupants of 10 Downing, downplayed legitimate concerns shared by growing swaths of the population as being somehow inappropriate, as if only bigots watched the news and concluded that lax immigration policies deserved, at the very least, close scrutiny. Some members of the party have come to see this strategy as misguided: Jack Straw, Labour’s former Home Secretary, for example, recently admitted that setting no restrictions on migration in 2004 was “a spectacular mistake” as well as a “well-intentioned policy we messed up.”

I could be a lot more forgiving of “well-intentioned” mistakes if the response to the people who criticised such things from the start was not so vicious.

If you’ve listened to the Remainers these last few weeks, you’ve heard this unique and noxious form of condescension in play. “Nationalism is on the march across the Western world, feeding upon the terrors it seeks to inflame,” wrote Harry Potter’s creator, J.K. Rowling, in a spirited anti-Leave screed on her website. For a minute there, you might’ve thought she was writing about Death Eaters, not ordinary folks who feel proud of their country, a normal and fundamentally human sensation viewed by most enlightened progressives these days as just two or three steps above setting fire to a wooden cross while wearing loose-fitting white sheets.
…
This vile line of argument was pulsating beneath most pro-Remain campaign efforts, whether self-consciously or not.

Yah – we’re all EAD’s now – or Death Eaters. Can’t remember which is worse. And here’s the ideology at work again – Leftist ideology that is.

Instead, we heard from Labour that what Brexit really is about is jobs and the economy and other good material things that good materialist Marxists tend to see as the core of all that matters.

But remember folks – it’s not about Left/Right.

They’re hardly alone in this view of the world: Speaking in Africa last year, Obama admitted to being baffled by the fact that so many of the continent’s despots cling to power even after they have so much money and could not possibly want for any concrete comfort. It never occurred to the president for one minute that there may be emotions beyond material needs that guide the hearts and deeds of women and men.

Nor does it occur to Obama, or to fellow progressives around the world, that the debate over immigration, sadly but obviously, isn’t about jobs or the GDP. You can point out all you want that immigrants are absolutely necessary to a country’s growth, that they bring in much more than they take, and other undisputed factual truths. But to do that you would have ignored the anxiety at the heart of this issue, an anxiety not without its real-world sources and not very well served by calling all who feel it a bunch of backward racists.

What’s grimly amusing is that even a loss has not forced a change in this argument. If anything such cries are now louder than before.

tom hunter

But taking a longer view, New Labour probably carries more of the blame than Labour’s current leadership for Britain crashing out of the EU. Had the former demanded transitional controls on Eastern European migration way back in 2004, there’s every chance that we would be waking up today to a resounding victory for Remain.
…
Labour expected only around 13,000 migrants a year to arrive in Britain; instead the figure was in the hundreds of thousands, hitting a record level of 333,000 just four weeks ago. In many ways the influx of migrants from the former eastern bloc countries had a tremendously positive effect. Migrants have done the jobs that Brits have been unwilling to do and they have contributed far more to the exchequer’s coffers than they’ve taken out in return. Ultimately, they have been quietly paying for the pensions of those who’ve just voted to kick them out.

But for all the economic benefits, immigration on this scale was incredibly unpopular, even among recent immigrants. Poll after poll told us as much.

Links embedded. Very interesting. Cue arguments that having made it they just wanted to pull the ladder up behind them, because evil…

But the promises to ‘listen’, to ‘get serious’ and to ‘respect people’s concerns’ sounded increasingly hollow as the years passed and European migration to Britain continued to soar to record levels. Those who banged the drum the loudest on immigration were often racists, thus it was assumed by well-meaning progressives than anyone who emitted even the mildest squeak of disquiet about immigration were, if not racist themselves, then happy to play the sordid politics of the ‘dog whistle’.

What I’ve always loved about “dog whistles” is how so many people claim they can hear them and resist the call. More evidence of intellectual and moral superiority I suppose.

When people were listened to on immigration, their fears were quietly put down to false consciousness. Their grumbles were, it was said in polite circles, code for something else: concerns about jobs, wages or the size of the mortgage. Jeremy Corbyn perhaps epitomised this sense of detachment from reality better than anyone. Even following the referendum result he has persisted in saying that the Leave victory was down to jobs, housing and the same old material things that cod-Marxists like Corbyn believe can explain everything.

Chuckle – and there it is again.

In urging voters to ‘take back control’, the Leave campaign tapped into this in a way that the Remain camp, with their statisticians and endless parade of captains of industry, was unable to. Yes, racism played a part; but anyone who wishes to lazily ascribe racism to more than half the electorate is making the very mistake which got us into this sorry mess.
…
We are witnessing nothing less than the creeping break-up of Europe. It will go out with a whimper rather than a bang, and it was set in motion a decade ago by Labour politicians who saw the English working class as a superfluous force who had nowhere else electorally to go. They pushed and pushed and pushed them and today, finally, the great unwanted have pushed back.

The salt of the earth were treated as the scum of the earth and, unsurprisingly, they wouldn’t stand for it. The dark consequences will be felt for generations to come.

tom hunter

It is also possible that losing an election is a sign that one’s position is weaker than one thought. In short, losing an election, including a referendum, is an opportunity for thoughtful introspection, not lashing out at the victors and their supporters.
…
As for reasons to vote for Brexit: there are many, but one stands out. The European Union is not a meaningfully democratic body. Members of the European Commission—the EU’s powerful executive arm—are not appointed by simple majority action in the European Parliament; likewise, members of the European Commission are not removable by simple majority action in the European Parliament.

Had the Remain Camp and the EU’s leadership put forward a real programme to make the Commission subject to normal, parliamentary democratic controls, then a majority of the U.K. electorate might very well have voted to continue with and in the wider European project. But the EU has proven time and again to be incapable of substantial reform along democratic lines.

The European Commission was exactly what so many of the Left love – a body of well-educated, “experts” with very high levels of self-regard who would make the right decisions carefully and scientifically for the good of all the people, without having to worry about said people booting them from control. It’s what many international agreements are about. Ultimately that’s what the likes of Corbyn yearn for, and all too many technocratic pieces of shit like Tory Cameron.

There is absolutely no chance whatsoever that Britain will not trigger Article 50. I don’t know why anyone is saying otherwise. The reason is that there is simply no scenario where Britain can still remain while the Conservatives, or their new Prime Minister, stay in power.

Conservative Party members will, for starters, never vote for a candidate who intimates reneging on the referendum results. Tory activists are overwhelmingly pro-Brexit.

The new Prime Minister cannot renege, because he or she will get the party slaughtered at election time, and may even deliver the unthinkable – Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn.

The parliament will be whipped into voting for Brexit, because otherwise the PM will simply go to the country, and dissenters will find their home constituencies are not amenable to reselecting them, or failing that, re-electing them. Failing support for a snap election, the PM will simply go to the members again for a fresh mandate, rinse and repeat. One way or another, Article 50 will be rammed through.

It’s happening. It’s done. Get used to it.

This referendum is a triumph. And it is also a triumph for New Zealand. For my entire life, most New Zealanders have seen the EU as the mistress who stole our husband, and as villains, especially the French. It’s bizarre that now Britain really is ridding itself of its adultery, that the NZ intelligentsia has suddenly decided they quite like Europe after all, even though this could have amazing benefits for this country. No more Froggie obstruction! We can deal with the Mother Country direct! And yet, like the Remainders, who are of that opinion in reality because they dislike and distrust Britain standing on its own two feet, they see the horrible scenario of NZ, once again, embracing its genuine lineage contrary to the ridiculous narrative that our future lies exclusively with Asia. I don’t think most New Zealanders share their nonplussedness.

As for this ridiculous notion that there are parallels between Brexit and Trump, there is some comparison in that ordinary working people voted for something against the better judgment of the intelligentsia. But that’s where it begins and ends. That doesn’t make one side right and the other wrong just by virtue of tribal identity. Arguments are always and everywhere best decided on the merits. The Brexit vote was nationalist, yes, but not isolationist. It was not autarkist. Very few, except probably the Bryan Goulds of this world, voted for Brexit because they thought it was a good thing to raise tariffs and reduce free trade with Europe. In that, the difference between Boris Johnson and Donald Trump could not be more stark, and actually, the only thing they have in common is silly blond hair and a big impertinent mouth. On the issues, and in terms of intelligence, they are chalk and cheese.

Right, good. Blair M. [ 7.58 ] Maybe some of us are reading too much . It just seems if I can use the analogy further, that Daddy hasn’t stopped fucking Mommy yet, and the children may have to go to the health camp.
There seems so much overlap between leaving membership of the Union, but wanting a relationship with Europe to be ongoing.
As long as it is as you say, unrestricted trade for us, and no blind alleys or back doors.
There is also the relief as you say of our own independent position, and that we do not want to be sucked into the vortex of this New World Empire thing.
We New Zealanders were so caught up in this thing, and the intensity of it.
The age factor was strange also. I could not ever imagine voting for the Empire of Bureaucracy, but maybe young people in Britain just do not like Westminster. I was pleased Farrar gave us these postings on Brexit, and to find out things

tom hunter

It was a great media ride while it lasted, with flocks of economic gurus and market analysts feeding a frenzy of alarming predictions and hyperventilated commentary. Many of the over-hyped warnings came with political and ideological undertones.

Screamfests. The MSM loves them: eyeballs, clicks, readers. They do it with every issue. Aided by back room people like traders and scientists who suddenly discover the love of the Klieg lights

The excitable chief of the Financial Times Catastrophe Desk, Martin Wolf, concluded last Friday that Brexit “is quite possibly” the worst event in British history since the Second World War. “It could mark an important moment in the West’s retreat from globalization.”

Uh huh.

No such signals appear in the real world. As markets opened and closed Wednesday, the fourth trading day following the vote, Brexit week barely shows up as a significant event on the charts. There is certainly more movement to come in the next weeks and months, but most of the market world is today essentially where it was the day before the vote, stalled and struggling with slow growth outlooks that have little to do with Brexit and much to do with other factors, including the EU governance regime.